Temporal Order Experiments

[Duke Wellington]

Temporal Order is the sequence in which we perceive events occuring.

There are situations in which a human being can experience time flowing backwards or to put it another way outcomes preceeding events. Basically when two events happen within a very short space of time (a few milleseconds) the brain can experience the outcome occuring before the cause 50% of the time. In essence time flow backwards.

I'm interested in the following experiment which has two possible outcomes:

Outcome 1: A causes C and then reality remains coherent with what just occured.

Outcome 2: B causes C and then reality remains coherent with what just occured.

Basically which ever cause comes first (a or b then it causes c and cuts the other cause off. If a and b are triggered within a few milleseconds of each other then we can perceive the lagging one occuring first. The question is does reality then remain coherent with the one we perceived as coming first even though 50% of the time it didn't?

This is a weird creepy experiment lol.

Edited September 20, 2014 by RabidMongoose

[StarMountainKid]

Interesting. Are there any links to this you can provide? Does what we perceive have any influence on reality?

[theotherguy]

Temporal Order is the sequence in which we perceive events occuring.

There are situations in which a human being can experience time flowing backwards or to put it another way outcomes preceeding events. Basically when two events happen within a very short space of time (a few milleseconds) the brain can experience the outcome occuring before the cause 50% of the time. In essence time flow backwards.

I'm interested in the following experiment which has two possible outcomes:

Outcome 1: A causes C and then reality remains coherent with what just occured.

Outcome 2: B causes C and then reality remains coherent with what just occured.

Basically which ever cause comes first (a or b then it causes c and cuts the other cause off. If a and b are triggered within a few milleseconds of each other then we can perceive the lagging one occuring first. The question is does reality then remain coherent with the one we perceived as coming first even though 50% of the time it didn't?

This is a weird creepy experiment lol.

Is this a physical experiment, or hypothetical? What I'm imagining in this experiment is something like:

Whenever Button A or Button B is pressed, a light turns on. If Button A was pressed, it comes on red. If Button B is pressed, it comes on green. Button A is pressed .002 seconds before Button B, turning the light red. Does the observer interpet this as Button A turning the light red or as Button B turning the light red?

[Duke Wellington]

Is this a physical experiment, or hypothetical? What I'm imagining in this experiment is something like:

Whenever Button A or Button B is pressed, a light turns on. If Button A was pressed, it comes on red. If Button B is pressed, it comes on green. Button A is pressed .002 seconds before Button B, turning the light red. Does the observer interpet this as Button A turning the light red or as Button B turning the light red?

Temporal Order effects for StarMountainKid: http://www.psych.upe...u/~saul/pto.pdf

(There are other temporal order effects too this is just an example)

Basically when two things occur within 80 miliseconds of each other then the brain can't tell which came first. In these circumstances it chooses one which can result in a person experiencing time flowing backwards or effects coming before causes. In my hypothetical experiment I'm not assuming that what occurs in reality is independant from the mind.

I'm simply proposing that an experiment is setup where an option perceived as coming first remains coherent with how reality then plays out. Therefore the aim is to test if perceptions can determine the course of reality. An experiment which shows the past is plastic might also be possible.

Libets Temporal Abnomalies (exotic mechanisms???): http://cornea.berkel...du/pubs/160.pdf

Edited September 20, 2014 by RabidMongoose

[Rlyeh]

I personally don't think the experiment would work. The experiments are talking about the brain being tricked, if anything the person would be in a state of confusion for the duration of the experiment.

Edited September 21, 2014 by Rlyeh

[Duke Wellington]

I personally don't think the experiment would work. The experiments are talking about the brain being tricked, if anything the person would be in a state of confusion for the duration of the experiment.

Yes, trick the brain to see if anything odd happens.

If reality comes from the mind then its a good experiment to test it.

[StarMountainKid]

I think it's interesting how the brain synchronizes events from different objective inputs. Different sensory inputs reach the brain at different times, and the brain must manipulate the temporal order of these sensory inputs to compensate, in order to synchronize these inputs in real time.

The idea here is that anticipation of an even can generate neural activity whose function is to produce a consistent neural story of the event.

In the case of catching a baseball, the consistent story by Nijhawan would be to have moving objects extrapolated in time (forward referral) to compensate for neural delays.The straightforward story to achieve synchrony is to have the remembered time of the even referred back to the anticipated time of the event.

http://cornea.berkeley.edu/pubs/160.pdf

Whether these temporal compensations affect physical time is open to discussion.

[White Crane Feather]

There are experiments that show that non manifested realities from quantum states are indeed plastic in the past.

Your experiment is interesting. I would fund it though I think we are observing the human brain failing on scales it has not evolved to operate at.

[Duke Wellington]

There are experiments that show that non manifested realities from quantum states are indeed plastic in the past.

Your experiment is interesting. I would fund it though I think we are observing the human brain failing on scales it has not evolved to operate at.

It would be interesting if exotic mechanisms were involved to correlate the past/future with what the brain believes to be real.

[MyOtherAccount]

Isn't this something that occurs in movies and for that matter occasionally in daily life? (The phone rings at the same moment someone knocks on your door. Two people start to talk at the same time. A man snaps his finger and the two runners beging the 100 yard dash.) If so, wouldn't we be noting the outcome you were speaking of?

Outcome 1: A causes C and then reality remains coherent with what just occured.

Outcome 2: B causes C and then reality remains coherent with what just occured.

Also, do you really mean that bot A and B cause the same C. Having an (Outcome 1) and an (Outcome 2) implies to me that we are speaking of two different unassociated outcomes. Yet, using C in both cases implies they are the same outcome. Thereby, I am as confused as Bennie Barborino on Welcome Back Kotter.

How about:

Outcome 1: A causes C and then reality remains coherent with what just occurred.

Outcome 2: B causes D and then reality remains coherent with what just occurred.

--MOA

[Rlyeh]

There are experiments that show that non manifested realities from quantum states are indeed plastic in the past.

Mind citing which ones? Because your favourite "the quantum delayed-choice experiment" isn't one of them.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0117

http://motls.blogspot.com.au/2010/11/delayed-choice-quantum-eraser.html

[Whisperer]

Surely its all a matter of conditioning?

If a society conditions one to operate at a certain wavepattern then any such experiments would need to adhere to the parameters of that wave pattern but if that same 'conditioning' was reimagined then the experiment may conceivably be relevent to the new order of parameters produced from the reconditioning?

I'm thinking here of the Chimpanzee experiments in Japan where Chimps were tested for memory at speeds beyond current human capacity to comprehend and that the subject Chimp performed flawlesly....

Similar scenario I thought.....